Defense rests in Malvo case
Prosecutors challenge sniper defendant's insanity case
 |
Story Tools
VIDEO
|
The sniper trial of Lee Boyd Malvo could go to the jury by late Tuesday, CNN's Jeanne Meserve reports.
Malvo's attorneys say he was under Muhammad's control during the killings.
|
SPECIAL REPORT
|
|
|
CHESAPEAKE, Virginia (CNN) -- Prosecutors rested their rebuttal case against Lee Boyd Malvo on Monday after a psychologist testified the teenage sniper suspect's alleged behavior in the killing of one victim was "the complete opposite" of someone who could not control his impulses.
Forensic psychologist Evan S. Nelson said Malvo,18, was legally sane during the October 14, 2002, shooting of FBI analyst Linda Franklin in the parking of a Home Depot store in Fairfax, Virginia.
Her death was one of 10 fatal sniper attacks that terrified Washington, D.C., and outlying areas of Virginia and Maryland. Three other people were wounded.
Malvo, who was 17 at the time of the attacks, is charged with capital murder, terrorism and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony in Franklin's death.
Psychologist Stanton E. Samenow testified Malvo was aware of the character of his acts and was not acting under any irresistible impulse during the sniper shootings -- criteria for determining sanity under the law.
Malvo's lawyers rested their case earlier Monday, and closing arguments could begin Tuesday. Malvo has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity.
His lawyers argue Malvo was brainwashed by John Allen Muhammad, 42, who was convicted last month by a jury in nearby Virginia Beach of killing Dean Harold Meyers at a northern Virginia gas station. The jury recommended a death sentence.
Malvo's lawyers contend the brainwashing was so severe that Malvo was legally insane and unable to tell right from wrong. (Full story)
Prosecutors introduced several letters into evidence Monday that they said Malvo wrote to a fellow inmate last summer that coached him on ways to fool authorities and encouraged him to look for opportunities to escape.
They said the three undated letters were written at a time when defense attorneys claim Malvo had broken free of Muhammad's psychological grip. The letters are posted on the Fairfax County Circuit Court Web site for the Malvo case.
Prosecutors said they obtained the letters after they were received by an inmate at the Fairfax County Detention Center, where Malvo was being held.
Inmates at the jail are prohibited from sending letters to each other, but Malvo sent the letter to a third party outside the jail who forwarded it, prosecutors said.
One gave what one prosecutor witnesses described as a "course" in how to feign dissociation -- the mental illness that defense attorneys say afflicts Malvo.
"You must be able to sit at the table with your enemy and not let them know that you 'hate there [sic] guts.' The key to achieving this is the ability to mask your emotions and feelings ... when I say mask I mean control what you say ... to get them to think you are somebody you are not."
Meanwhile, The Associated Press reported that prosecutors plan to let jurors hear from survivors of shootings linked to Malvo as they present witnesses this week to support their argument that the teen told police the truth and lied to the psychiatrists.
Credibility battle of experts
Investigators say Malvo confessed to the shootings after his capture last year. But the defendant changed his story months later in interviews with defense mental health experts, saying Muhammad was the shooter in all but one of the 10 killings.
Defense mental health experts testified last week that Muhammad spent months indoctrinating Malvo by controlling Malvo's diet and exercise, telling him blacks were oppressed by the white government, teaching him to fire weapons, exposing him to violent movies and video games and isolating him from family and friends.
Psychiatrist Neil Blumberg, the final defense witness, said the indoctrination left Malvo legally insane at the time of the killings. He said Malvo confessed to the shootings because he wanted to protect Muhammad.
Ultimately, "it's not so much a matter of whether the kid lied," said Radford University criminal justice professor Tod Burke in an AP report. "It really comes down to whose experts you believe the most."
Defense attorney Craig Cooley objected to the additional prosecution testimony, saying rebuttal witnesses are supposed to counter what the defense witnesses told jurors, not what Malvo told the witnesses.
Circuit Judge Jane Marum Roush ruled against Cooley, saying that if Malvo is "an unreliable informant about his history, ... isn't that something the jury should consider in determining whether the expert's opinion is credible?"
CNN's Mike Ahlers contributed to this report.
Copyright 2003 CNN. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Associated Press contributed to this report.
